THE STATE COMMUNICATIONS: THEORETICAL
MODEL AND REGIONAL PRACTICE
Tatyana Gromova,
Samara State Pedagogical University, Samara, Russia
Published: Collected research articles, Bulletin of Russian Communication
Association "THEORY OF COMMUNICATION AND APPLIED COMMUNICATION", Issue
1 / Edited by I.N. Rozina, Rostov-on-Don: Institute of Management, Business and
Law Publishing, 2002. - 168 p. P. 35-43.
Abstract
This article concerns the problem of development a dialogue between the authority and
the society. The basic theoretical concepts and historical roots of this problem are analized in it.
The specific features of different kinds and channels of the state communication functioning in
Russia is examined, and some regional features are found. There are the results of the research
into the communicative interaction of the regional government body and the society, carried out
in Samara.
In modern Russian sociology and politilogy it is accepted to look at
political-communicative processes basically within the pre-election campaigns,
when active communications of political leaders and the electorate can be seen.
Today electoral communications is one of the most popular themes for the theorists
and practical workers, who deal with the problems of information exchange in
political system. At the same time, the other aspect of communicative interaction
of authority and society, the one pointed to form the constant constructive dialogue
with the purpose to maintain the legality of the existing order and giving stability
to it, is practically not investigated. There is also hardly a definition, that
determines this phenomenon. So, for example, G. Pocheptsov uses the term “the
governmental communications” [Pocheptsov, 1998], which seems to be too
narrow, because it does not reflect all the variety of levels and ways of
communicative interaction between the authority and a society. The definition “the
state communications”, is more adequate and universal, but this one is seldom used
in the conceptual device of Russian scientists.
The nowadays situation considers that the mentioned political
communications are not too widely spread and in the practice of Russian political
subjects (including the bodies of state management), which during elections prefer
a series of powerful information "attacks" to systematic formation of public
opinion using the mechanisms of feedback. However, the varying social-political
and economic situation in our country also dictates the other priorities in the field
of communicative policy. All these transformations require judgement and study,
both on theoretical and practical level.
The problem of mutual relation of authority and society excited still ancient
Greek philosophers, whose ideas were developed in the works of N. Machiavelli,
J-J Roussean, T. Hobbes, J. Locke and other philosophers. The most active
discussion on this theme was conducted within the theories of a mass community
(G. Le Bon, G. Tarde, J. Ortega y Gasset, K. Mannheim, G. Blumer etc.). Besides,
mutual relation in the system “the authority – the controlled” were actively
discussed during dwelling on a civil society, which became active on the wave of
democratic transformations in the former socialist countries in the 90-s of XX
century. All this indicates the high interest to a problem of making a dialogue
between the authority and the society, and its information component.
The greatest contribution to development of notions of the mechanism and
components of politic-communicative processes was brought, to our mind, by the
representatives of the methodological methods like behaviorism (G. Lasswell, P.
Lazarsfeld), cybernetic ( N. Wiener, K. Deutsch) structural-functional (G. Almond,
J. Coleman) and the communicative itself (J. Habermas, H. Arendt, M. Foucault).
Analyzing the progressive process of development of methods of communicative
process in the system of state government, it is possible to ascertain, that
consideration of the state communications, as unidirectional process of
communicator’s influence on the audience by various means, was replaced with
much attention to the feedback, which gives the political system stability and
efficiency of development. The communications is now considered as the major
function of any system. And finally, the researchers came to the conclusion that
any social system (including political) is a product of human interaction based on
mutual understanding and the consent, that becomes possible, first of all, as the
result of communicative interactions.
The state communications is the regulating and coordinating mechanism in
mutual relation of the state and the society, it provides stability and efficiency in
functioning of social body in whole. The mission of the state communications is to
carry out the following functions:
- the conservative function, pointed to keeping the status-quo of the state
system, that provides the stable existence of social body;
- the coordinating function, pointed to provide the coordination of authority
influence of the ruling subject according to parameters of object of management,
and their possible changes;
- the integrating function, connected with realization of the state policy,
which would take into account the interests of all elements of social system,
which would provide making and taking the coordinated administrative decisions;
- the mobilization function, pointed to the ensuring of legality of the
existing social order, providing the society support and approval of the accepted
administrative decisions;
- the socializing function, connected with adopting of social-political
norms, values and traditions of the state, increasing the level of political
competence of the citizens during the information exchange.
All these functions have different importance in the various periods of life of
this or that state. For modern Russia the main, to our opinion, is the function of
decrease of social intensity, which is pointed to ensure the further movement in the
field of democratic transformations.
The process of the state communication consists of the elements, typical for
any communicative act. These are: the communicator (the subjects of state
management of various branches and levels of authority); the message itself
(official and informal information, oral or written, verbal and not verbal); the
recipient (the society as a whole, various institutions of the civil society, a personal
recipient); channels of distribution of the information (interpersonal, institutional
and mass); channels of the feedback (requests, applications of the citizens, various
forms of political participation etc.); process of coding - decoding of the
information (preparation of the information messages, their adequate interpretation
by the audience etc.); various sorts of noises (technical, semantic, psychological).
In the considered process it is possible to find various kinds (depending on the
branch of the authority: legislative, judicial, executive), levels (federal, regional,
local), directions (vertical, horizontal), and each of them has both its own
specificity of functioning and a set of the used technologies and methods of
interaction.
It is possible to classify the methods, the forms and channels of the state
communications according to the different bases. The famous researcher of politiccommunicative processes R.-G.Schwartszenberg [Schwartszenberg, 1992] points
out the following channels:
1. communication via the informal channels;
2. communication via organizations;
3. communications via mass media.
The method of the communications via informal contacts or interpersonal
dialogue is one of the most ancient, it existed in primitive communities. But even
now, in modern political systems having the advanced network of means of the
mass communications, it plays a significant role. In this method two basic aspects
can be seen. The first is connected with the situation, when the communications is
carried out via interpersonal dialogue as the basic channel of giving and receiving
the information. This channel is marked with the greater emotional connection
between the communicator and the recipient, which makes it sometimes much
more effective, than, for example, mass media.
The other aspect of the communications via informal channels is that the
interpersonal dialogue is included in the process of broadcasting and adopting of
the information by means of mass channels. P. Lazarsfield demonstrates it in his
research, marking, that some information broadcasted by the means of the mass
communications is not perceived directly by the a mass audience. The influence
here comes via the intermediaries - “the leaders of the opinion”. They are more
prepared for perception of the information, they are more informed, they better
understand the flow of the messages of mass media and they always can show their
opinion in this or that information ground. Thus, the messages of mass-media first
are adopted by “the leaders of opinion”, and then, by the means of interpersonal
dialogue to the mass audience.
The next method of the state communication is the communications via
organizations. The link between the authority and the controlled here are the
political parties and groups of interests, which mediate the mutual relation between
political system and the environment. These institutions are called “gatekeepers”,
and they are to articulate and cumulate the group interests.
The third main channel of the state communications is mass media, which
plays more increasing role in spreading the political information in the modern
society.
Dealing with the channels of informational interaction of the authority and
its structures in modern Russia, it is possible to note, that the basic channel of
informing in the system of state ruling is mass-media, which becomes, as a matter
of fact, a powerful subject of authority, and with its help it “purposefully constructs
the political orders” [Soloviev, 2000]. And the increasing role of mass-media as
the channel of the state communications occurs in the practical absence of
information interaction with the help of other channels.
But for finding some certain channels of communication, it is important, to
our mind, to classify the methods of informational interaction used by the
contractors of the communications. For the typology of such methods of the state
communications the way, offered by Russian politologist A.I. Soloviev, seems to
be the most suitable. He managed to divide the widest variety of actions in the
political-information space into two types: propaganda and marketing [Soloviev,
2000]. The propaganda type represents rigid ways of the information control of
peoples’ minds. The propaganda tries to overcome the basic conscious restrictions
of an object of influence, becoming a manipulating process. The examples from
History show, that the State had frequently enough used the manipulating methods,
like misinformation (using the false items of information, replacement of the true
items of information by false, using fictitious information), defamation, the
technology of “white noise” (glut of the information field), technology of the spindoctor (change of semantic accents of the information) etc.
To overcome possible negative consequences of use of such rigid methods
of information influence are supposed the marketing strategy of construction of
communicative interaction. They are formed in conformity with the laws of supply
and demand of information services.
From the second half of the XX century, the political marketing
demonstrates “the steady tendency to expansion of its methods, thinking, and
technologies in the sphere of state ruling” [Morozova, 1999]. Political public
relations and political advertising are traditionally regarded as political marketing
technologies.
The basic feature of methods of the state PR, as the technology of
communication links formation, is that here is used indirect, and consequently,
faint communicative influence in comparison with direct and strong influence,
which the propaganda represents. Thus, defining the specificity of application of
PR technologies in the state ruling, it is possible to see public relation to influence
on public interest. This can be done by means of coordination of interests, during
which:
a) The interests of a society turn to favourable expectation of the ruling
initiative;
b) The ruling initiative is corrected in conform to the expectations of a
society [Miroshnichenko, 1998].
Most full PR and advertising technologies are put into practice during
marketing campaigns, carried out by the state, which are a part of democratic
process of acceptance of the state decision.
The western practice of functioning of directing bodies has many examples
of realization of effective communication campaigns. So, in France in the
beginning of 70-s of XX century the campaign for safety of road movement has
started. It lasted several years and gave positive results. By the 1987 the French
government has already carried out 37 similar campaigns with the total cost 236,7
mln. francs. [Morozova, 1999].
In this country such type of strategic and long-term planning of public
relations has not yet been wide spread, because of many reasons connected both
with objective reasons inherent in the subjects of the state communications
(instability of political and economic situation does not promote development of
such communication forms), and with the subjective, internal contradictions in
development of state management system, like absence of experience, knowledge
of communication methods, and also unwillingness of the officials to build a
dialogue with the population within the new, frank, democratic bases.
The process of communication in Russian system of state management is
determined by the leading role of the state-communicator.
In our country the state was considered traditionally as extremely strong,
dominant institute. As U.F. Oleshchuk, the Russian researcher in the field of
problems of state management points out, this incredibly powerful authority and
the traditional special importance of the authority provoked two public emotions,
opposite and natural: the great hope and the great hatred to it [Oleshchuk, 1998].
The destruction of habitual "Soviet" systems of tutelage and control has caused
some evident change of estimations and expectations concerning the state. So, after
a series of research, carried out by the Russian research centre VCIOM in 1989,
1994 and 1999, the opinion of the Russian people has practically lost the idea “the
state favoured us with everything...” [Levada, 1999]. At the same time, the
readiness to sacrifice anything for the sake of the state has sharply decreased. The
researchers of VCIOM have fixed in the whole the increased demonstrative
estrangement of the people from the state, that in turn provides negative influence
on the estimation of activity of bodies of management and level of trust to them.
In the background of obviously negative attitude of the population to the
bodies of state management, the researches have fixed one more tendency. The
state officials were sharply negative concerning the importance and utility of
participation of the citizens and institutions of a civil society in ruling, and the
necessity of the citizens’ control of the authority structures.
Thus, the basic contractors of the process of state communication are
obviously negative to each other, that does not promote any development of the
constructive information exchange between them.
Nevertheless, the state communications gradually becomes one of the
important parts of the social-political life of the country. At the regional level it is
distinguished by a number of specific features. The research, carried out in the
Samara region, examined the communicative interaction of the regional body of
management (the Administration of the Samara region) with the society, and it
allowed to find some distinctive features, which can be obviously met in the other
subjects of Russian Federation. During the research there were interrogated the
representatives of the basic participants of the process of state communications: the
inhabitants of the region (N=1200), the officials (N=80) and the journalists
(N=72), that allowed to carry out the complex analysis of the investigated
phenomenon.
According to the results of research, the distinctive feature of the regional
state communication is the high level of its personification. Information policy of
the Administration of the Samara region, as the results of daily monitoring of
published and electronic mass-media show, in the period from October 28, till
August 31, 2001, was directed mostly on representing activity of the first persons
of the region. According to the data of this monitoring, the quantity of representing
activity of the Samara region Governor considerably exceeds any of structural
divisions of regional administration (table 1). So, in the researched period the
amount of the articles concerning the Head of the region, almost four times exceed
the amount of the articles concerning the activity of the most represented at that
moment the Fuel and Energy Department. The number of the TV programs, in
which the Samara Governor appeared, has twice exceeded the similar parameter of
the structural division of the Administration of the region mentioned above. It has
the result of making the personified image of regional authority in mass media,
thus the important directions of the executive authority work are ignored.
The table 1. The parameters of representing of persons and five basic structural divisions of the
Administration of the Samara region in mass-media (there is the data about the amount of
mass-media materials in the period since 28.10.2000 till 31.08.2001, in absolute numbers)
Represented persons and
structural divisions
The Governor of the Samara region
The Fuel and Energy Department
The Department of Building, Architecture, Housing and
Communal Services and Road Facilities
The Department of Public Health Services
The Department of Science and Education
The Department of Social Protection of the Population
The total number of materials
TV-reports,
programs
1384
677
publications
1288
344
227
139
314
228
89
172
163
102
One more feature of communication between the regional authority and the
society, is that the state structures mainly use the direct channels of informing,
completely ignoring the channels of feedback.
During research all respondents were offered to agree or disagree with a set of
judgements, which characterize the attitude to the problem of cooperation between
the society and bodies of the state management. And the judgements both had the
real situation of interaction of the bodies of management with the population on
informing it about the activity, and the opinions on necessity of such cooperation.
The received data compared between each group of the respondents (table 2).
The table 2. The comparison of the agreement degree with judgements: “the authority bodies
should conduct an active dialogue with the population, even if the population does not show any
initiative” and “the authority bodies carry out the active work with the population, they try to
inform it on the accepted decisions and chosen policy” (in percentage to the number of
respondents)
Degree of
the consent
Agree
Disagree
Can hardly
answer
TOTAL
The population
Supposed to
conduct
80,6
3,1
Conduct
The journalists
Conduct
11,0
58,6
Supposed
to conduct
86,1
5,6
16,3
30,4
100
100
The officials
Conduct
20,8
62,5
Supposed to
conduct
95,1
1,1
8,3
16,7
3,8
20,0
100
100
100
100
21,3
58,7
The opinions of the research participants show the significant difference in
estimations of the required dialogue between the authority and the population, and
real activity in this field. And the tendencies in this estimation are identical in all
the interrogated groups.
As it can be seen from the table, the officials are more inclined to consider,
that the bodies of management should conduct the dialogue with the population
(95,1%). It is interesting, that the interrogated inhabitants of the area demonstrate
smaller consent with the given statement. At the same time, a large percent of
respondents can hardly give the answer to this question, which testifies to the
absence of thinking about such kind of cooperation.
The important characteristic of the information cooperation of the state
structures and the society is the degree of an openness of authority, and the
possibility of getting any required information by the representatives of massmedia. In the estimation of this possibility the answers of journalists and officials
were different. More than a half of regional Administration officials believe, that
the journalists can absolutely free receive any required information. At the same
time almost 80,0% journalists are sure, that the receiving of such information
depends on the wish of officials.
At the same time, the journalists have highly enough estimated the degree of
an openness of regional Administration in comparison with other authority
structures, of both federal and municipal level. So, 52,2% interrogated journalists
have told, that the Administration of the Samara region is most open for the
citizens, societies and journalists. While, for example, the openness of federal
structures have mentioned only 4,2% respondents.
The journalists in their estimation of the information given by the
Administration of the Samara region about its own activity (press releases,
information, comments), mark its mainly positive character (54,9%). At the same
time more than half of journalists (52,1%) consider this information doubtful, and
53,5% respondents call it boring.
As for the officials, estimating the information on activity of regional
Administration, which occurs in mass-media, point out, that it is positive (47,5%)
or neutral (45,1%). 55,0% interrogated officials consider this information
interesting, and only 22,6% - boring. Estimating the reliability of the information,
occurring in mass-media, the opinions of the officials differed as follows: only
37,5% consider it reliable, 16,3% - non-reliable and 46,3% interrogated could not
estimate the reliability of the information.
Estimating the quality of journalistic publications about the activity of the
Administration of the Samara region, the opinions of the officials were divided
practically fifty-fifty: 46,3% interrogated are satisfied with the quality, and 45,1% are not satisfied. The cause of bad quality of articles, TV-reports and radio
programs, to the opinion of the officials, first of all, is the low level of journalists
professionalism. This is the opinion of nearly a half of the officials, who are not
satisfied with the quality of the publications; 17,5% officials see the reason of this
situation in the fact that the authority structure is closed, and 18,8% point out the
absence of the experts in the Administration, who could cooperate with the
journalists.
But for estimation of the various characteristics of the information,
exchanged by the partners of a dialogue, during research there was studied the
satisfaction of the respondents by the amount of the information about the activity
of the Administration of the Samara region. The greatest degree of satisfaction by
the information on regional Administration, occurring in mass-media, was shown
by the journalists: 3/4 interrogated mass-media employee consider the amount of
the information sufficient. Meanwhile amongst the officials this parameter is much
lower: only 56,2% interrogated were satisfied by the amount of the information
about the activity of the regional Administration, and more than 1/3 point out
insufficiency such information . And the population showed the lowest satisfaction
by the amount of the information. Only 43,9% interrogated inhabitants of the
Samara region have pointed out, that they have enough information. The large
percent of respondents of the population of Samara region could hardly answer the
given question (almost quarter of all the respondents). It can testify, on the one
hand, that the information of that kind does not cause interest in the inhabitants of
region, but, on the other hand, plenty of the people who could not estimate the
amount of the information cooperation show an unsufficient level of its
development, the absence of the usual social representations and expectations of
norms of such cooperation.
Besides the results mentioned above demonstrate the tendencies serious
enough. So, the population, for whose sake the information in mass-media is given,
is in the least degree satisfied with its amount. While the journalists, who are
supposed to provide this process, show the greatest degree of satisfaction. Such
situation can cause that mass-media, a nowaday censor of publications, will limit
the amount of the information about the regional Administration activity, while
more than 1/3 of the population of the Samara region consider, that it is not enough
as it is. Certainly, the question of quality of the given information is also
important, because now, as a rule, it often looks like dull reports, and, certainly,
pushes away the population, especially the young generation; however the results
of research again prove influence of satisfaction by the amount of the information
on the positive estimations of activity of bodies of authority. So, the respondents,
who consider the information on activity of the Administration of the Samara
region sufficient, have higher degree of trust to the bodies of management and their
activity.
The respondents, who have specified insufficiency of the information on
activity of the Administration of the Samara region in mass-media, were offered to
define the reasons of the given phenomenon.
Both the population and the journalists find the basic reasons of
insufficiency information in the position of the Administration, which is not
interested in granting materials about its activity (51,3% and 31,9% accordingly).
Among the officials interrogated this reason was mentioned only by 12,5%. The
next important reason was the character of activity of authority structure, where
there are hardly events necessary to inform. 1/3 of interrogated inhabitants of the
region and the journalists mentioned the given reason. The officials, on the
contrary, point out, first of all, the unwillingness of journalists themselves to
represent the given theme (32,5%) and absence of interest with the population 12,5% interrogated officials.
However, the journalists and officials are united in the opinion that, in the
bodies of authority there are no experts capable to conduct the dialogue with massmedia. Among the journalists this reason was mentioned by 20,8% interrogated,
among the officials - 12,5%.
Thus, it is possible to point out a number of obstacles in development of the
state communications at the regional level: the keeping mistrust to the authority
structures, the closeness of the authority, the absence of the officials’ interest to
conduct a dialogue with the society, and also the absence of necessary personnel,
legal and financial maintenance of such communicative interaction. However,
despite of all difficulties mentioned above, it is obvious, that there is already
generated a need for creation a dialogue model of the communication between the
state and the society, and it is obvious for all its basic participants: the officials, the
journalists and the population.
References
Levada U. A. “The Soviet Man” Ten Years After: 1989 - 1999 (preliminary results of
comparative research) // Economic and Social Changes: Monitoring of Public Opinion. The
information bulletin. 1999. №3 (41). - p. 7-15.
Miroshnichenko A.A.. Public Relations in Society-Political Sphere. Provincial Practice. Moscow: An Expert Bureau, 1998. – p.144.
Morozova E.G. The Political Market and Political Marketing: Concepts, Models, Technologies. Moscow: ROSSPAN, 1998. – p. 247, ill.
Oleshchuk U.F. The State Machinery in Russia // World Economy and International Relations.
1998. № 4. – p. 131- 135.
Pocheptsov G.G. The Theory and Practice of the Communications. - Moscow: The Centre, 1998.
– p. 352.
Soloviev A.I. Politology: The Political Theory, Political Technologies. - Moscow: Aspect Press,
2000. – p. 559.
Schwartszenberg R.-G. Political Sociology. Part1. - Moscow, 1992. – p.121.
About the author:
Gromova Tatyana
Ph.D., Instructor, Department of Journalism, Linguistics Faculty, Samara State
Pedagogical University, Samara, Russia, e-mail: tangrom@mail.ru